Let’s talk about Queen Elizabeth

Homepage Forums Small Talk Let’s talk about Queen Elizabeth

This topic contains 19 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by  Davis 1 week, 6 days ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #44493

    Belle Rose
    Participant

    I am watching from afar (in the US) all of the news on Queen Elizabeth and her upcoming funeral. I have seen mixed reactions on the news. Some people are not “mourning” her death. I don’t know enough about British history to understand what they are talking about. I’ve always ever known the Queen to just be this little old granny who loves her family and seemed to be well respected by the world. But this other side I want to understand it. Can anyone help me understand? Forgive my ignorant American ass 😂

    #44494

    Simon Paynton
    Participant

    Not everyone in the UK is a monarchist.  Some people are republicans, who want to do away with the monarchy, on purely ideological grounds.

    #44499

    It is difficult to imagine King Charles 3 as the head of the Church of England, the Church founded on the family moral values of Henry 8th. I think Charles is descended from Henry’s sister, Margaret but I don’t know much about the royal blood line. I used to drive past Buckingham Palace every day on my work commute. They never waved at me so I have stayed rather insouciant towards the monarchy. I once had to sign the Official Secrets Act when I started work for the Dept. of Health in Whitehall and was working in an office next door to the Junior Minister for Health (Edwina Currie). Like her, I was an atheist. I remember mumbling some of the words that related to “her majesty” or “god” but I have still kept my mouth zipped. I wondered if she did the same!It was all just civil service bureaucracy. I left after a few months, once a specific project was completed.

    • This reply was modified 2 weeks, 3 days ago by  Reg the Fronkey Farmer. Reason: removing any hint of royal incest from my comments :-)
    #44500

    Simon Paynton
    Participant

    I believe the Scottish aren’t so keen on the royalty because many of them want to break away from the UK, and resented it when the Queen said she was Queen of Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland.  Similarly, Northern Irish nationalists.

    #44502

    I have never had any allegiance for any group or been a fan boy of anything. I will watch any sports event only if I think it will be time well spent. I don’t care which team is playing. I just want to see a good match. I don’t understand the mentality of someone who devotes their life to following a football team. I have seen grown men in tears over “our team” losing a game and other committing acts of violence in its name. Some of these guys are just sad. Just snap out of it man! I do “follow” the Irish Rugby Team but I don’t lose sleep over it or jump around the room over a score.  It’s the same with “super fans” of the Queen or Trump or imaginary god or whomever or whatever else anyone cares to mention. Stop grovelling and get a life!

    #44503

    Autumn
    Participant

    It is difficult to imagine King Charles 3 as the head of the Church of England, the Church founded on the family moral values of Henry 8th. I think Charles is descended from his sister, Margaret but I don’t know much about the royal blood line.

    I had to read that several times before I realized you are saying Charles is descended from Henry the 8th’s sister and not that Charles is descended from his own sister. While fully possible, the latter would have been quite the talent for incest. Talented or not, I’d prefer to keep all of them off our coins, but failing that I’d rather keep QEII.

    Anyway, regarding the OP, to mourn the passing of a monarch or not? Queen Elizabeth II served as the reigning sovereign of Canada. Charles III has already been named the new sovereign of Canada. This position is a hair’s breadth more than a formality, but far less than a real governor in practice. It’s expected that our government will pay respects to the Queen’s passing and the King’s ascension. There are a surprising number of monarchists, traditionalists, and people who just like the royals who will be sad in the same way one might be when a beloved celebrity dies.

    In Canada, there are many who don’t really recognize the monarchy as the head of state and think we should do away with them in our constitution. There are those who despise the existence of monarchies and oppose the colonialism of this monarchy in particular. There are those both indigenous to Canada and who immigrated here who have suffered quite directly under colonialism and its ongoing impacts.

    Was Queen Elizabeth II a good person? She led a unique life. Perhaps, had I been raised in her position, I’d have shown myself to have lesser character as an individual human being. Yet it’s difficult to characterize her as a force for good. Her philanthropy is something empowered by privilege afforded to her by bloodshed. Handing out goodness from on high while standing on the bones of others is a curious ethical position. Likewise, she is characterized as someone who supported the cause of decolonization, but that isn’t benevolence so much as a meagre attempt at redressing harms. For the privilege inherited out of that colonialism, it’s a pretty meagre effort in the grand scheme.

    Again, what this says of her individual character is unclear. But having chosen to retain her station and privilege, she becomes accountable for the weight of it, and for its bloody legacy. It’s difficult to see QEII or any British Monarch, on balance, as a force for good in my eyes. They can only be, perhaps, better or less horrific than their predecessors.

    #44504

    Simon Paynton
    Participant

    Yet it’s difficult to characterize her as a force for good.

    Arguably, the Queen was a force for good – for the UK, on the world stage, and also, domestically.  For the commonwealth?  It’s always good when nations cooperate for peace.

    #44505

    Autumn
    Participant

    Cooperate for peace? Seems like a stretch. Lasting peace was formed between many nations both in and out of the Commonwealth post WWII. Prior to that, the history of war is rather long and bloody. Obviously a simplification of complex history, but is the reigning monarch really that much of a variable in this era? Is the Commonwealth? Without it, I doubt Canada would have been any more likely to wage war on the UK than it has been on the US. Certainly we haven’t altogether stopped killing people on foreign soil.

    Even after the Westminster Statute 1931, the harms of British expansionism and colonization continued. Again, Queen Elizabeth II is not individually responsible for that, but the good she does comes out of the profit of that violence and abuse. It is unlikely there will ever be an amount of good a British monarch can do in our lifetimes that will tip that scale back.

    #44507

    @autumn – One has edited one’s post on the lineage of the royal bloodlines 🙂

    #44508

    Autumn
    Participant

    Kinda make Charles less interesting though.

    #44509

    _Robert_
    Participant

    To me the royalty seems like a living museum of sorts, but the tampon king is particularly unappealing.

    #44510

    Simon Paynton
    Participant

    It is unlikely there will ever be an amount of good a British monarch can do in our lifetimes that will tip that scale back.

    The British monarchs benefit Britain.  As for other countries, I agree, it’s debateable.

    #44513

    I was present here for the coronation of Willie Nelson.

    #44557

    Autumn
    Participant

    Five-mile queue to see the Queen’s coffin. At first I couldn’t wrap my head around it, but on reflection, I don’t think there could be a more British send off than extreme queueing. That said, I wonder if all of them know what they’ve lined up for or if some just got sucked in out of compulsive habit.

    #44559

    PopeBeanie
    Moderator

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.